"The spirit of Antioch's Sexual Prevention Policy is about 'yes' ... The spirit is about a fully affirmative Yes. Not an ambiguous yes, or a well-not-really-but-ok-I-guess yes ... This is about Yes, um hum, absolutely yahoo Yes! ... Being with someone you are sure you really want to be with that is exciting, is erotic, is deep, is great, is Yes! That is consent. That is the spirit of the policy." It is exhilarating to be part of a community that is working so hard to increase equality and mutual satisfaction and to rectify domination and oppression.

And, from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences 2003 pamphlet on Academy Standards:

"There are many within the Academy today ... who use the phrase 'Academy campaign' without irony or embarrassment. It is not at all necessary, though, that such a concept or such a thing exist.

"The simplest most direct path to protecting the Academy Awards Process from debasement real or suspected would be to arrive at a point at which electioneering disappeared entirely."

I envision, thus, a perfect world, in which both the randy young at Antioch, and the careerist film producer find a playing field level as that which God intended.

In this world the lion shall lie down with that lamb, and only with that lamb which has spelled out its consent, vide:

"If the level of sexual intimacy increases ... (ie if two people move from kissing while fully clothed ... to undressing for direct physical contact, which is another level), the people involved need to express their clear verbal consent before moving to that new level." But how, in what is clearly the heat of the moment, will those remember to turn aside and consider, so as to fulfil both the letter and the spirit of the law?

Our other document may help.

"The Academy does not presume to tell its members when they may and may not invite friends to their homes ... at the same time, the Oscar-season 'parties' that in fact are heavy-handed lobbying occasions have become ... distasteful ... self-tests for whether a dinner party really is a dinner or a party, as distinct from a tactical manoeuvre in an Oscar campaign include the following ... "

Which list is an aide for (and a caution to) those ethically conflicted about the true nature of their canapes.

The Academy, much like the stoics of an earlier day, suggests the conflicted consider his motives, and, if still in doubt, review who is footing the bill for the entertainment - is it the host himself, or a studio or production company - are guests invited in the hope that they have gained an appreciation of the artist and his difficulties "faced and overcome" during filming?

"'Yes' answers indicate treacherous ethical waters."

These clarificatory documents, in common with The Rights of Man, et cetera, exist to force one's attention to abuses to which the perpetrator or victim has become desensitised - the first step toward a recompleted humanity, then, must necessarily be shock at the gulf between our practice and right reason. Eg: "All sexual contact and conduct between any two (or more!) people must be consensual."

But there will always be collusion. Collusion is, indeed, the true and necessary state of communal endeavour. Just as money is to be made in the stock market, it seems, only, by what the deluded know by the sobriquet "insider trading", so, according to the Solons of Antioch, healthy sex can only be ensured among the young by a watchfulness as that of our friends the Medes and the Persians.

For will not the young collude and conspire against law, reason, custom, and tradition, in order to hide the salami? And will not the depraved, fame- and fortune-starved members of the Academy serve ceviche in an other-than-disinterested manner?

In short, yes.

To speak of the Movie Business, which is my assigned beat: wherever there is community secrecy and the possibility of invidious gain or repletion there must be collusion.

The human mind cannot tolerate the spectre of waste presented by the possibility of chicanery without detection. The very vehemence with which the Academy presents its good-willed and patient plea informs as to the impossibility of its implementation.

For, in each, the fault is not with the participants, but with their stars.

The young will not stop copulating like rabbits, and no amount of what is, finally, voyeurism and child abuse on the part of The Administration will turn them from the course of lust. Neither will the members of AMPAS cease voting for their self-interest, which, is, and must be, the nature of all awards ceremonies.

The movies is a cut-throat business, the business is entertainment, and we should be glad of the entertainment value of a bunch of pirates proclaiming their mutual goodwill and probity.

Perhaps even extending to ourselves the same licensed smirk of the randy Antiochites, with the same necessary rejoinder: "OK. You first."